Monday evening, May 9, the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council,
in conjunction with the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, held a
public question-and-answer meeting to address cobia management issues,
including an upcoming closure of the fishery, at the Hilton Garden Inn
in Kitty Hawk.
The meeting was attended by roughly 50 people at the site, as well as 60 to 70 attendees who tuned in via an online webinar.
recreational fishery for Atlantic migratory group cobia is scheduled to
close on June 20. The closure applies to those fishing for cobia
recreationally in federal waters from Georgia to New York from a
private vessel, charter vessel, or headboat.
North Carolina, the federal waters’ jurisdiction extends from 3 miles
to 200 nautical miles offshore, although the inshore North Carolina
state waters mirror the NOAA fisheries restrictions.
scheduled recreational closure has caused concerns from fishermen,
particularly those from North Carolina and Virginia, where the closure
will have negative economic and social impacts because of the
seasonality of the fishery.
a result, tensions and tempers of the attendees were high and continued
to rise for the more than four hour duration of the meeting.
In between public comments, the council made five presentations which outlined the following:
- What the council does and how it works in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and other agencies
- The history of cobia management
- The cobia SEDAR stock assessment
- The CMP Amendment 20B and cobia closure
- The future development of the cobia framework
the 2016 season closure is due to accountability measures required by
federal regulations in the amended Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Management
Act to protect the cobia resource and prevent overfishing.
2015 recreational catch was 1,540,775 pounds, which was well over the
recreational annual catch limit (ACL) of 690,000 pounds. This annual
catch limit is set from the Georgia-Florida border to New York state.
The East Florida-Gulf region, which had a recreational ACL of 830,000,
was under its limit with a total of 372,118 pounds.
attendees, who were a mix of commercial fishermen, charter boat
captains from North Carolina and Virginia, and even fishing pier
owners, had a number of issues with multiple facets of the closure and
participants were well-versed on the subject – utilizing language from
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Management Act, and at one point even
university-conducted studies, to make their points – and the council
answered questions as best as they could or promised to direct
information to the proper channels.
as dozens of questions and comments were vocalized throughout the
evening, there were a few running themes that highlighted the fishing
community’s top concerns.
DISPROPORTIONATE EFFECT OF CLOSURE
issue that was raised several times was how a June 20 closure will
affect North Carolina, and especially Virginia, as their cobia seasons
start much later than the more southern states.
“Ninety percent of our season in Virginia is going to be gone,” said a Virginia representative.
speaker noted that the closure was especially hard for pier owners, as
pier fishermen typically don’t start seeing cobia until after the
closure is in effect.
is going to decimate the pier livelihood, because it’s a huge part of
the pier income, and the cobia don’t hit the pier until summer,” said
the speaker. “The pier guys are not going to get anything at all.”
is a singular accountability measure that is an end of season closure
not discriminatory against the states at the end of the migratory
pattern?” asked another speaker. “This seems like a clear violation of
National Standard 4. The fact that the negative impact is directly
proportional to the amount of representation present on the council is
THE ACCURACY OF THE DATA
of the biggest issues for attendees was the accuracy, or potential
inaccuracy, of the recreational data. Many speakers stated that they
had never been checked or had not seen surveyors on the fishing docks.
The council stated that it was an angler-based survey.
been cobia fishing for 10 year and have been checked maybe twice in
those years and don't know anyone that has been checked in the
last five years,” said one webinar attendee.
is no way feasible we could have reached this limit,” said a public
commenter. “The people in this room are the contenders. I have never
been surveyed. We throw them on the dock, and nobody’s been checking. I
personally don’t know one person who has been checking.”
concern about the data belied a greater concern that the cobia season
closures would continue to become even stricter in the years to come.
The anglers present at the meeting, who are in the water constantly,
did not believe that the data backed up what they saw first-hand on a
is why we are so skeptical of log books and data collection,” said one
fishermen, who relayed how over the years he had continued to see
plenty of red snapper, even as the seasons were getting shorter. “Four
years ago there was a nine-day season for red snapper. The following
year was three days, the next was one day, and the following year was
none. Why do we want to help you with data when we prove without a
shadow of a doubt that the [population isn’t changing?] The cobia
season could go this same direction.”
ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
Another major concern for several speakers was the lack of an economic impact study of a season closure.
there been an economic impact study done as required by
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Management Act?” asked one speaker, “Or are
you just going to ignore this… and not follow your own rules?”
economic study was done in amendment 12, but what wasn’t analyzed was
if the season got shortened,” replied Gregg Waugh, executive director
of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council.
you all feel these impacts are too much, you have the ability to sue.
That’s a route,” he said. “The council is doing everything we can to
change this – but we can’t do anything for this year.”
Multiple frustrations were brought to light through dozens of comments as the meeting went on.
we catch them, they’re saying it’s being overfished, and if we don’t
catch them at all, the population is down,” said one commenter.
“Frankly, Gregg, I wouldn’t trust you if your tongue was notarized,” said webinar participant Jonathan French.
And out-of-the-box solutions were considered and proposed by the participants.
need to contact your senators,” advised a Virginia fishermen. “That’s
what we did in Virginia. We started contacting our state senators and
saying we’re losing thousands of dollars every year, and now they’re
listening. That’s what you need to do here.”
evening concluded with the final presentation and an overview of
possible long-term solutions and short-term solutions for the following
council asked the crowd if changing the vessel and/or bag limit was a
possibility, but anglers agreed that reducing the limit would
exacerbate the problem.
and release isn’t going to cut it,” said one charter boat captain. “If
I have six people on a boat, and they’re paying $1,200, catch and
release isn’t going to be worth their money.”
potential solutions involved separating the allocation by state, but
the council recognized that it could take a while to implement.
could also do state-by-state allocation, but that’s going to take more
time. The council recognizes the big differential and we’re working to
Other potential solutions for 2017 and beyond included:
- Changing the recreational fishing year from Jan. 1-Dec. 31 to May 1-April 30, or June 1- March 31.
a step-down limit of two fish per person per day that’s reduced to one
fish when 75 percent of the commercial ACL is met, and/or a vessel
limit that is reduced when 75 percent of the commercial ACL is met.
the recreational accountability measures. Right now the season length
is reduced if recreational landings exceed the recreational ACL and the
total ACL, and the evaluation is based on a rolling average. This could
be changed by reducing the ACL by the amount of the overage if
overfished, or by determining the season’s length on previous year’s
are encouraged to make any public comments for the upcoming SARMC June
meeting by May 20. The meeting will be held June 13-17 at Cocoa Beach.
Fla., and the public can also speak at the meeting itself.
June, the South Atlantic Council will review public input and make
changes to the amendment, so the public is encouraged to get their
comments in. The eventual preferred alternatives will be approved in
September for formal review by the secretary of Commerce, and will go
into effect in spring 2017.
comments must be received in the council office by 5 p.m. on May
20. Comments may be submitted by mail, email, or fax:
comments should be directed to Gregg Waugh, Executive Director, South
Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, Charleston, SC 29405.
- Email comments - Send to [email protected] with the Subject Line “Cobia Comments”.
- FAX comments - Send to 843/769-4520.